Air supremacy is the highest level, where a side holds complete control of the skies. It is defined by NATO and the United States Department of Defense as the "degree of air superiority wherein the opposing air force is incapable of effective interference."Air superiority is the second level, where a side is in a more favorable position than the opponent. It is defined in the NATO glossary as the "degree of dominance in [an] air battle ... that permits the conduct of operations by [one side] and its related land, sea and air forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by opposing air forces."Air parity is the lowest level of control, where a side only holds control of skies above friendly troop positions.

I po mom vrlo realan opis situacije iznad vietnama.

Quote

The U.S. held air superiority as defined by the USAF and NATO but not air supremacy. Air supremacy, a condition under which the US has operated in most recent conflicts is a degree of air superiority where the other side is incapable of effective interference. That was not the situation in Vietnam, either over the North or the South.

The US air situation in Vietnam was similar in many respects to the air situation over Europe in 1944 against the Germans. Over those battlefields the US had air superiority and the Luftwaffe had little if any ability to intercept or attack Allied aircraft. However, German AA fire was highly effective, downing thousands of Allied aircraft over the course of the war on typical battlefield support and interdiction missions. This is very similar to the situation the US faced operating over South Vietnam. North Vietnamese jets seldom if ever contested the skies over the South, but nonetheless the US and ARVN lost thousands of aircraft (to include helicopters) to all manner of AA fire, from guns to missiles.